Here:
PR_BEITC_recommendations_8-24-17
Here.
Here is the press release that omits any actual recommendations. Here is the report summary that also says nothing.
But this excerpt asks us readers to assume that comments by supporters of national monuments should be ignored because they are merely statements “orchestrated” by “national . . . organizations”:
Comments received were overwhelmingly in favor of maintaining existing monuments and demonstrated a well orchestrated national campaign organized by multiple organizations.
Update: news coverage from earlier today quoting a Utah politician attacking national monument supporters as “rock lickers” — an excerpt:
Mike Noel, a Utah state representative, said that reducing or eliminating Bears Ears would be “a victory for our state.” Federal management of land in his state had constrained drilling, mining and grazing, he said, adding that Washington had no business setting aside so much land for the strict protection that monument status affords.
“When you turn the management over to the tree-huggers, the bird and bunny lovers and the rock lickers, you turn your heritage over,” Mr. Noel said.
Here are the materials in El Paso Natural Gas Co. LLC v. United States (D. Ariz.):
130 El Paso Supplemental Brief
Prior post on this case here.
Here are the materials in Oglala Sioux Tribe v. Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
Here.
Here.
Jason A. Robison, Barbara A. Cosens, Sue Jackson, Kelsey Leonard, and Daniel McCool have posted “Indigenous Water Justice” on SSRN.
Here is the abstract:
Indigenous Peoples are struggling for water justice across the globe. These struggles stem from centuries-long, ongoing colonial legacies and hold profound significance for Indigenous Peoples’ socioeconomic development, cultural identity, and political autonomy and external relations within nation-states. Ultimately, Indigenous Peoples’ right to self-determination is implicated. Growing out of a symposium hosted by the University of Colorado Law School and the Native American Rights Fund in June 2016, this Article expounds the concept of “indigenous water justice” and advocates for its realization in three major transboundary river basins: the Colorado (U.S./Mexico), Columbia (Canada/U.S.), and Murray-Darling (Australia). The Article begins with a novel conceptualization of indigenous water justice rooted in the historic United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP)—specifically, UNDRIP’s foundational principle of self-determination. In turn, the Article offers overviews of the basins and narrative accounts of enduring water-justice struggles experienced by Indigenous Peoples therein. Finally, the Article synthesizes commonalities evident from the indigenous water justice struggles by introducing and deconstructing the concept of “water colonialism.” Against this backdrop, the Article revisits UNDRIP to articulate principles and prescriptions aimed at prospectively realizing indigenous water justice in the basins and around the world.
You must be logged in to post a comment.